The guy inside isn't a pedophile. He just used Varys's body parts for a ritual. Let him go afterward (and possibly treated the wound). So it wasn't personal for the sorcerer until Varys got ahold of him...even though he was Varys's primary motivator for years.

I haven't watched episodes 4 and 5 yet, but this greatly surprises me. Having read all of the books, I don't recall Varys's eunuchness being actually explained anywhere. Then again, my memory is quite terrible. Is it actually ever clarified in the books?

Guys, the people on that thread are asking as a favor to anyone with further knowledge to please leave it out of it, dont you think its the classy thing to comply?

I agree that the classy thing to do is to avoid Spoilers or potential Spoilers for the TV crowd. Further, I would challenge you to find a single post of mine in that thread that was a spoiler. I think it is a VERY slippery slope to start banning subsets of membership from specific threads. And a gross overreaction when most of us were behaving just fine. Especially since The Sam's moderation.

Really. I understand the impulse to be part of a conversation in which you know more than most of the other participants. I don't agree with this impulse, but I understand it.

Just please play nice? With sugar on top? And acknowledge that there HAVE been some problems before that have forced the moderators to be heavy handed? Maybe you did not cause these problems, but this thread, or the Internet, does not revolve around you. Yes, you are a member of the forums, and you paid money you earned. But no one is banning you, they are ASKING you to PLEASE comply.

We're on a forum, that we're all members of, and in this place, I feel that I can participate in any thread that interests me. And it so happens that ASOIAF interests me greatly.

Even when the people for whom that conversation is intended asked you to please not.

Of course, no one is denying you are in your right, just as if you were in a bar. All I am saying its a very self centered thing to do.

It wasn't a "please stop", it was "shut the fuck up" and questioning whether anyone that read the books just liked being assholes. All for not doing the shit that people were accusing them of. If you want to use the bar analogy, it's like everyone agreeing not to bring up a local team losing their last game, since it was so sad, everyone is having a good time, discussing other things, someone brings up the next game, and someone else jumps up on the table and screams at half the bar, telling them to shut the fuck up about the last game.

Edit: seriously, there weren't any book spoilers. One person asked a book question and was told it was discussed in the book thread. Then someone else made a "dirty book reader" comment, and we had a mod freak out. People ARE complying. If you don't think so, please cite a post.

There have been a LOT of "please stop"'s but it is just not working. It never works. There is always one or two dorks who feel the need to ruin it because. They have created this situation, not the moderators. The moderators are not in this to oppress you, they are in it to protect the people for whom the thread was originally created: people who are watching the show, and not reading the books. Do you fit this demographic?

From the forums I participate in, this is actually THE most lenient I have seen when it comes to this issue, and as a result a lot of people have been spoiled over the years. No bans have been handed. Only threats. Yet here we are.

You dont have to keep it A SECRET, but do you have to drop it out there every chance you have? Does it contribute? Most likely it just makes the other readers leery of whatever you have to say, given the history of how things have gone for them when book readers decide to participate.

The guy inside isn't a pedophile. He just used Varys's body parts for a ritual. Let him go afterward (and possibly treated the wound). So it wasn't personal for the sorcerer until Varys got ahold of him...even though he was Varys's primary motivator for years.

I haven't watched episodes 4 and 5 yet, but this greatly surprises me. Having read all of the books, I don't recall Varys's eunuchness being actually explained anywhere. Then again, my memory is quite terrible. Is it actually ever clarified in the books?

Thanks. I'm glad that mod could confirm that the moderation post in question was an overreaction to something that did not happen. Seems like the thread, even filled with dirty book readers, does a pretty good job of self enforcing.

This thread makes me feel happy with my decision to stop discussing TV shows in the Lounge. This community has enough assholes to make it a chore.

Also 2 years after the show started and book readers are still shitting up the TV thread? Not surprising, since it will only stop once mods take actual action against offenders. Has anyone been banned over spoiling?

This thread makes me feel happy with my decision to stop discussing TV shows in the Lounge. This community has enough assholes to make it a chore.

Also 2 years after the show started and book readers are still shitting up the TV thread? Not surprising, since it will only stop once mods take actual action against offenders. Has anyone been banned over spoiling?

No one. After many ineffectual "pretty please guys, stop it!" the threat was handed, and a lot of butts were hurt, so here we are.

I am with you with the community thing, for that kind of topic I stick to a certain large forum in which any offender would be banned and forgotten about in minutes.

This thread makes me feel happy with my decision to stop discussing TV shows in the Lounge. This community has enough assholes to make it a chore.

Also 2 years after the show started and book readers are still shitting up the TV thread? Not surprising, since it will only stop once mods take actual action against offenders. Has anyone been banned over spoiling?

No, because the spoiling for the most part stopped. The fact is that the most recent moderation, which caused this whole thread, was an over reaction. It was to someone falsely accusing the thread of containing book spoilers when it did not.

Hey guys, I don't want to play book vs. series police. But this thread is clearly marked for discussion of events and characters are portrayed in the series to date. While the briefest of mention above of someone's preference for a character's portrayal in the series over their portrayal in the books obviously can't be considered a spoiler, I think it's appropriate to remind everyone that--for the purposes of this particular thread--the books may as well not exist. Please restrict discussion to the events and characters portrayed in the series to date. There's another thread for the combined discussion of both the book and television series.

I think if you guys stick to the bolded part no one will have problems with you. You dont have to go back and delete anything.

Just out of politeness, guys. Even if you are not spoiling anything, the TV people dont even like reading your comments if they know you read the books.

I would also say that as readers, we should not correct people's mistakes about characters' motivations, ethics, or morality. The discussion about whether Jaime had any redeaming qualities is a case in point. Let them debate it among themselves. If they cannot get themselves to believe Jaime becuase they mis-remember a scene, or have forgotten a small bit of exposition, let another non-reader correct it. Correcting it gives them a clue that it's important. When I read the books, it took a while for me to believe that Jaime was honorable in his own way, while still being flawed. Let them go on the same journey.

It is not just spoilers that is an issue. It is the fact taht certain "past facts" are beiong corrected, and not others.

Separately, Mods, thank you for letting us have this discourse rather than locking the shit out of this thread, which would have been totally understandable.

++

I think that all acts of moderation should be able to be discussed openly as long as they are in an appropriate thread. I would hope that the mods would be willing to join those threads to discuss their acts.

That said, Looks like we have some to a universal agreement that book readers are allowed to post as long as they are extremely careful about what they post.

I wonder if there is a way for a Mod to edit the first post of that thread to reflect The Sam's well worded

Quote:

Hey guys, I don't want to play book vs. series police. But this thread is clearly marked for discussion of events and characters are portrayed in the series to date. While the briefest of mention above of someone's preference for a character's portrayal in the series over their portrayal in the books obviously can't be considered a spoiler, I think it's appropriate to remind everyone that--for the purposes of this particular thread--the books may as well not exist. Please restrict discussion to the events and characters portrayed in the series to date. There's another thread for the combined discussion of both the book and television series.

This seems simple enough, I don't understand why it's taking 2 pages to hash this out. Some people would like to discuss the show without spoilers. If you cannot post in such a way then please post in the other thread, which is wide open for you to discuss however you like. We don't need 3 threads. Talk about the show in the book thread, knock yourself out. The point isn't to segregate by content type, it's to prevent information that doesn't belong in one space from leaking in.

Spoiler: Mods don't have magic psychic forum filters, where they can tell that you've read the books already. You can post anywhere even if the book is under your pillow. Just keep it to yourself, because that's what's polite without a mod having to tell you so.

I think it's as simple as the Sam and fifield put it last week and the week before:

Show Thread

Assume no one read the books.

Book readers keep book stuff in your pants but otherwise enjoy and participate in the conversation about the show.

Any fact or further character development not present in the show is off limits.

for non-book readers: Something posted by a 'book reader' isn't necessarily a spoiler just because you forgot about it or missed it in the show.

Book + Show Thread

Anything goes.

Assume all books have been read by all posters.

Those who havne't read all the books, enter at your own risk. no Spoiler tags required.

Simple.

The only caveat is, I reserve the right for my fellow book readers to post "LMAO!!!!!11!!" and only "LMAO!!!!!11!!" AFTER certain events occur in the show. To wit, the proper and expected response from those who haven't read the books shall be "Fuck you!!!!!!!!11!!"

(please note proper number of ! and 1 in your response is crucial. Offer not valid in Tennessee.)

This seems simple enough, I don't understand why it's taking 2 pages to hash this out. Some people would like to discuss the show without spoilers. If you cannot post in such a way then please post in the other thread, which is wide open for you to discuss however you like. We don't need 3 threads. Talk about the show in the book thread, knock yourself out. The point isn't to segregate by content type, it's to prevent information that doesn't belong in one space from leaking in.

Spoiler: Mods don't have magic psychic forum filters, where they can tell that you've read the books already. You can post anywhere even if the book is under your pillow. Just keep it to yourself, because that's what's polite without a mod having to tell you so.

Which is what people have been doing. No one disagrees with you or any of the mods on this point.

The problem was that a mod threatened to preemptively ban ALL Book readers from a thread for the potential future actions of a few, especially as an over reaction to a book spoiler that didn't actually happen.

From Official Moderation.

Quote:

I'm getting real close to making this thread off limits to anyone who's identified themselves as having read any part of the books.

That is VERY different than the common sense approach that everyone already agrees to. Even the "Book Readers" who want to talk about the show only, tell people to go to the other thread who start talking about the books.

There is a difference between threatening to lock a thread to specific users who spoil and threatening to lock it to a whole group of people because of the actions of someone else.

The real problem is that even though that thread was self enforcing it's agreed upon rules, someone made a unsourced comment about book spoilers and a Mod over reacted.

Pretend the books do not exist. Problem solved. If everyone followed this rule, that mod would never have "over reacted". In my opinion, the mods in this forum have way too much patience. I could never be a mod!

Pretend the books do not exist. Problem solved. If everyone followed this rule, that mod would never have "over reacted". In my opinion, the mods in this forum have way too much patience. I could never be a mod!

Pretend the books do not exist. Problem solved. If everyone followed this rule, that mod would never have "over reacted". In my opinion, the mods in this forum have way too much patience. I could never be a mod!

Well, 90% of the time, 90% of the posters here are civilized adults. I think that goes a long way to getting us plenty of rope to hang ourselves with.

Pretend the books do not exist. Problem solved. If everyone followed this rule, that mod would never have "over reacted". In my opinion, the mods in this forum have way too much patience. I could never be a mod!

Except that from the point of the previous official moderation, everyone except for 1 poster did follow the rules. And that poster a) did not spoil anything and b) was immediately directed to the other thread by non mods reminding everyone of the rules.

Then there was a discussion based only on what was on the show.

The Moderation was simply an unnecessary overreaction in both tone and purpose.

It's already been explained. "Logically, if you are a reader who is playing nice, the ban doesn't apply to you."

I'm sorry you can't or won't understand that.

You can't understand it because it's a non-definable condition.

It's circular. "If it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you." You've given no attempt at a definition of what "nice" means.

I think pointing out factual errors in people's account of the show is fine. Someone else might think that merely correcting a factual inaccuracy shows that the inaccuracy is relevant and therefore a spoiler.

E.g., "I think John Snow is a secret Targaryen" -> "But he burned his hand fighting the dead guy" -> "But Viserys burned to death with molten gold, and he was definitely a Targaryen" -> "Molten gold is not the same as fire" -> Etc.

Are any of those spoilers? WTF knows? I haven't finished Book 5, and I don't know that it's ever been made clear who John Snow's real mother is. Those are all presented directly in the show, no book knowledge necessary. Does that count as "nice" ?

In a conversation about finding bastard Baratheons, does it count as "nice" to mention that someone is forgetting the bastards Robert fathered that were explicitly mentioned and a relevant plot point in a prior episode?

Except that from the point of the previous official moderation, everyone except for 1 poster did follow the rules. And that poster a) did not spoil anything and b) was immediately directed to the other thread by non mods reminding everyone of the rules.

Then there was a discussion based only on what was on the show.

The Moderation was simply an unnecessary overreaction in both tone and purpose.

We've seen just that kind of thing leading to nested spoilered discussions, arguments over what is and isn't a spoiler, and eventually someone posts "Well that's irrelevant because Jaime was transported aboard the Starship Enterprise at the end of book 19". They won't or don't bother to go back and spoiler it, the mods don't get to it very quickly, and a bunch of people have their shit spoiled thanks to this one jerk.

The fact that people that have read the books have proven themselves to be so consistently terrible at avoiding this outcome justifies this position. If we don't have a strong ban where non-spoiler posts are grounds for moderator intervention, we don't have a safe TV thread period.

It's already been explained. "Logically, if you are a reader who is playing nice, the ban doesn't apply to you."

I'm sorry you can't or won't understand that.

You can't understand it because it's a non-definable condition.

It's circular. "If it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you." You've given no attempt at a definition of what "nice" means.

I think pointing out factual errors in people's account of the show is fine. Someone else might think that merely correcting a factual inaccuracy shows that the inaccuracy is relevant and therefore a spoiler.

E.g., "I think John Snow is a secret Targaryen" -> "But he burned his hand fighting the dead guy" -> "But Viserys burned to death with molten gold, and he was definitely a Targaryen" -> "Molten gold is not the same as fire" -> Etc.

Are any of those spoilers? WTF knows? I haven't finished Book 5, and I don't know that it's ever been made clear who John Snow's real mother is. Those are all presented directly in the show, no book knowledge necessary. Does that count as "nice" ?

In a conversation about finding bastard Baratheons, does it count as "nice" to mention that someone is forgetting the bastards Robert fathered that were explicitly mentioned and a relevant plot point in a prior episode?

Without a definition of "nice", the "clarification" isn't.

What a lot of over analyzing. Can't you just pretend the books dont exist, in that thread?

Easy policy for correcting someone in the show thread: post relevant clip of the show. Someone just did it to answer a background question about Tyrion, and it proves without a doubt that something is not a "book spoiler".

Except that from the point of the previous official moderation, everyone except for 1 poster did follow the rules. And that poster a) did not spoil anything and b) was immediately directed to the other thread by non mods reminding everyone of the rules.

Then there was a discussion based only on what was on the show.

The Moderation was simply an unnecessary overreaction in both tone and purpose.

We've seen just that kind of thing leading to nested spoilered discussions, arguments over what is and isn't a spoiler, and eventually someone posts "Well that's irrelevant because Jaime was transported aboard the Starship Enterprise at the end of book 19". They won't or don't bother to go back and spoiler it, the mods don't get to it very quickly, and a bunch of people have their shit spoiled thanks to this one jerk.

The fact that people that have read the books have proven themselves to be so consistently terrible at avoiding this outcome justifies this position. If we don't have a strong ban where non-spoiler posts are grounds for moderator intervention, we don't have a safe TV thread period.

No one is arguing that non-spoiler posts shouldn't be grounds for intervention. I think most "book readers" in the thread would support actual bans on people who actually give spoilers. But a) the rules has NEVER been "your not allowed to post if you read the book" and b) a mod threatened to ban ALL self admitted book readers for a spoliation which never actually happened. Even if it had happened, it's an inappropriate threat to group all group readers together as book spoilers.

Fact is that the thread functions very well as it is. It is pretty much self moderating at this point as demonstrated by the events of the last few pages.